Saving some big money seems simple enough.

Eliminate one of the city’s eight fire stations thereby freeing up 12 firefighters. Use those people to fill in staffing gaps that is now costing more than $1 million. Nobody loses a job and the taxpayers get relief.

With the exception of schools, Fire is the costliest of city departments. The department’s operating budget is almost $20 million this year, seemingly making it the best place to start to look for savings.

But cutting costs isn’t simple.

Remarkably, even though closing a station would free up a minimum of 12 firefighters, it wouldn’t save on overtime payments. The most the city would pocket are utility costs, perhaps $20,000 to $30,000, if that much.

In addition, points out Warwick Fire Chief Kevin Sullivan, minimum response times would be increased heightening the risk to the residents and property owners of Warwick. Sullivan also raises the question of what station to close. His point is twofold. First, what neighborhood is going to accept a reduction in fire and rescue service – a choice that would certainly meet strong opposition from that ward’s council member and elected representatives? Second, Sullivan points out that Green Airport makes Warwick unique. Its placement in the geographic middle of the city makes it difficult to supplant or augment service from one area by another. It is like a chain where each link is connected to two others rather than a weave were links are interconnected on multiple sides.

However, even if those issues could be addressed, the savings are minimal.

The reason is minimum manning requirements as set forth in the firefighters’ contract that expires in June 2012.

Currently the department is budgeted for 217 positions, yet only 200 are filled.

It would seem, therefore, to make all the more sense to close a station if the intent is to save money. There would be no need to fill those 17 vacant positions, at least not all of them. Costs would be reduced as well.

It doesn’t work that way.

By contract, the city’s 9 fire engine companies shall be operated with no less than three firefighters on each apparatus, one of whom shall be an officer. The agreement goes on to set a similar standard – in this case two firefighters one of whom is an officer – for the three ladder companies.

The city’s four rescue companies are to be operated with no less than two employees per vehicle. Add to this a special hazards unit with a minimum of three employees and two battalion chiefs and you have a total of 46 employees and 17 vehicles.

So, even if the city were to close a station, by contract it is required to have that many employees on duty and that many vehicles around the clock.

Those requirements also account for the fact that the Fire Department has seen the least reduction in staffing – one position – one of all major departments as the city administration has sought to balance the budget. The city including the sewer authority and water division has a total of 890 budgeted positions, a reduction of 40 from the last fiscal year.

The biggest chunk of those reductions is in the Police Department that now has a complement of 163 positions, down 17 from the ’09 fiscal year. Police do not have contractual minimum manning requirements although Col. Stephen McCartney seeks to maintain platoons at certain staffing levels.

“It’s huge,” City Personnel Director Oscar Shelton says of the savings generated by the reduction in the Police Department. Overall, the police salary costs are more than $1 million less than last year.

There are other factors that make public safety personnel more costly than other municipal employees. It also partially explains why overtime costs are high.

Shelton said the benefit costs of police and firefighters is 60 percent of their salary costs as compared to 44 percent for other municipal employees. The higher cost for police and firefighters is a reflection of their ability to retire after 20 years of service thereby adding to pension and health care costs.

This situation promotes the use of overtime rather than bringing the Fire Department to its full budgeted complement of 217 positions.

Overtime pays time and a half or 150 percent of salary. Bringing another member on the force is actually costs 160 percent of salary when benefit costs are added to the calculation.

“When they just look at overtime,” Shelton says of critics who harp on overtime costs, “they aren’t looking at what it would cost to eliminate overtime.”

The critical factor is minimum manning, however. Those requirements not only set staff and vehicle numbers, but also the numbers of officers on duty at all times. In addition, those who fill in for officers are paid at that rank even if they are of a lower rank.

Last year firefighters, as well as city unions, took pay cuts ranging between 3 and 5 percent from March through June to help balance the budget.

“They stepped up to the plate and I applaud them for that,” says Shelton.

The problem is that the city faces another unbudgeted cut in state revenues. The mayor is looking to offset the anticipated loss of $7 million in automobile tax reimbursements and is working with staff to find the savings.

As Shelton observes the administration has little leverage to gain concessions from firefighters. He notes the union membership isn’t likely to voluntarily give up benefits and there’s noting the city can trade such as a no lay off guarantee because of the manning provisions.

Shelton believes savings could be realized with a public safety administrator. The city has had such a position in the past and the job of the administrator is to contain costs and oversee day-to-day expenses of the two departments. The task would be to find efficiencies through improved scheduling and a “plethora of things” the two chiefs don’t deal with.

The cost of such a position Shelton put at $120,000 to $125,000, “but you could pick that up in a week or two.”